Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
"Bad Single"?  
User currently offlineCicadajet From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (12 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1929 times:

So, today, I received a personal message from a screener in a rejection email.

Considering the amount of invective coming the screeners way from time to time, and a personal message generally an instance of a screener going out of his or her way to help how to fix a problem or to explain the rejection, I'd especially rather not complain about a rejection in such an instance, but this one is confusing to me.

I had this image

MyAviation.net photo:
Click here for bigger photo!
Photo © Tom Turner

rejected for

"These photos have already been added to the database or you have
uploaded other photos that look very much like these. Please read more
on this issue in the Upload-FAQ." etc... and:

A comment from the screener regarding this upload:
"Xxxxxxs-1.JPG : ID 463952"

Well, here's that one..accepted back in November...

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tom Turner

Is this to be considered a "bad double"?

Anyway, I am prepared to let the rejected image go (ie: not appeal it or re-upload, because it has other problems...and I am not new to getting images rejected..) just thought it looked "ok" and people might want to take another look at that day...but I bring this up here, because I feel the Bad Double issue is becoming subjective to the point of being arbitrary. But perhaps I am off base here?


2 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineYevgeny From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 199 posts, RR: 10
Reply 1, posted (12 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1893 times:

Hey Tom, that's the limit! You have one accepted it's enough  Big thumbs up !
By the way really nice pic!!!


User currently offlineFutterman From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1301 posts, RR: 40
Reply 2, posted (12 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1863 times:

You're right, Tom, it does seem to be arbitrary and not very professional. But, it's nothing new (complaint wise), and I'm sure the screeners have got the point already. Despite the fact that it doesn't seem to be showing--otherwise your thread wouldn't be here. Not much more to say...

Still a great shot, regardless...but what are the other 'problems' you speak of? Other than it not being the sharpest, clearest photo... Big grin

Great work,

What the FUTT?
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why The "double" Rule Did Not Apply Here? posted Fri Feb 29 2008 14:34:27 by OlegShv
Your A.net "goals" For 2008 - Already Reached? posted Fri Feb 29 2008 06:35:11 by Jorge1812
"Category" Help, Please posted Thu Feb 21 2008 14:22:48 by Vzlet
Would This Be Considered A "bad" Double? posted Tue May 23 2006 05:22:02 by Je89_w
Would This Be "bad Motive"? posted Fri May 19 2006 19:15:32 by AIRBUSRIDER
"Bad" ...Selfscreening? posted Sun Feb 5 2006 20:54:55 by INNflight
What Is "bad Cropping"? posted Mon Sep 12 2005 11:15:08 by LIPH
Bad Acceptance For "artistic" Angles?!? posted Sun Aug 21 2005 18:24:22 by Jhribar
Need Help On "bad Category"..... Again. posted Tue Mar 15 2005 20:53:29 by Aviopic
Another Case Of "bad Info" posted Mon Mar 14 2005 10:50:05 by Aviopic